Not so concerned about the EVF although it is sometimes a bit washed out when looking up-sun when held in portrait format. My very practical concern is the dreadful battery life that makes taking a spare essential (my batteries have had lots of charges so it is not a running in issue). Highlight clipping is bad too. The marking is quite generous wrt overall functionality.

Paul, as DPR stated, the highlight clipping issue can be addressed by simply using "iDynamic High" setting for JPG's, which gives a smoother highlight rolloff vs more of a straight line to the top, which matches EM-1's level, incidentally. And in comparison the EM-1, EM-5 and GH3 in their highest DR settings ("Gradation Auto" in the Olys), it has the greatest JPG highlight headroom: 2/3 EV greater than EM-1 and GH3.

I would be happy if video functions became an option and if bodies were manufactured without any video. If I want video, I will use a video camera...and get better results!

that's not realistic in todays world. That's like asking camera manufacturers to not include auto focus as they want the 'manual' feel of old film cameras. Reality is, video is a part of cameras and frankly is only going to become more important as time goes on. Well, maybe not for us older folks (though I don't consider myself THAT old), but for the younger generation, video is a must in cameras.

As for better results...hmm...that depends, assuming you know what you are doing, video from GX7, GH3 etc. are top of the field and are of professional levels, well, GH3 anyhow, though GX7 comes close...albeit with a number of limitations such as lack of mic input. For the average joe's, yes, consumer video cameras probably are better, but for those interested in video, the likes of GH3 or even the GX7 is far better than consumer level video cameras.

As many have noted the rating for the GX7 should have been higher ? If you look at the rating chart you can see the GX7 did well in every category but since there are no numerical values shown makes it difficult to challenge whatever mark DNR decided to give the the GX7 but appears to be subjective not objective?

I was beginning to wonder if DPR would do this test given it took them a year to do one for the GH3 and none at all for the G6 GF6 GX1 etc but published one for the EM1 only weeks after it was introduced? Appears they had to given the rave reviews from other sources on the GX7 Still in their comparisons they fail to emphasize its EVF more than twice the resolution of that of EM5, likewise that of the LCD screen, no flash on EM5 with extreme yellow cast in low light, and GX7 has WiFi connectability. Also DPR used different lenses of different focal length to make their comparisons? No wonder some think there may be a bias favoring Oly when it comes to testing and comparing these products.

Interesting when comparing the recent DPR shots from the tiny GM1 many found them even slightly better then those from either GX7 or EM1!

As many have noted the rating for the GX7 should have been higher ? If you look at the rating chart you can see the GX7 did well in every category but since there are no numerical values shown makes it difficult to challenge whatever mark DNR decided to give the the GX7 but appears to be subjective not objective?

I was beginning to wonder if DPR would do this test given it took them a year to do one for the GH3 and none at all for the G6 GF6 GX1 etc but published one for the EM1 only weeks after it was introduced? Appears they had to given the rave reviews from other sources on the GX7 Still in their comparisons they fail to emphasize its EVF more than twice the resolution of that of EM5,

numbers are not important here. The viewing experience is what counts. The E-M5 finder is better than many others, which have nominally higher resolution.

likewise that of the LCD screen, no flash on EM5 with extreme yellow cast in low light

there is a setting in the camera configuration that produces warm colors in low light. If you turn that off, the white balance is very good in low light conditions

, and GX7 has WiFi connectability. Also DPR used different lenses of different focal length to make their comparisons? No wonder some think there may be a bias favoring Oly when it comes to testing and comparing these products.

conspiracy with no evidence for it

Interesting when comparing the recent DPR shots from the tiny GM1 many found them even slightly better then those from either GX7 or EM1!

When i first considered the GX7 I was concerned about the 'tearing' issue of the EVF. I tried it in the shop and have not experienced rainbow tearing at all in 2 weeks usage. Other reviews say the same. The data rate on the GX7 is increased from the G5/G6 EVFs so this should lessen the effect. Some people seem to notice the effect more than others so if you are concerned go and try it out for yourself.

I find the statement that it cannot be used outdoors to be nothing short of absurd.

And as for 'adds bulk to camera' of course it does, but not nearly so much as the VF4 perched precariously on top of the Olympus EP-5.

The bulk argument is nonsense of course.

This review and scoring does not appear to be very objective to me.

Just because you don't agree with the result, that does not mean that the review was not taken with care. A review is always some sort of subjective, the important thing is, if it is conclusive.

I find the review very reasonable. If the reviewer sees strong rainbow tearing, should he ignore it? The still very good result just did not make it to 80, which would have given it the gold award. Thinking that the judgement of the view finder is the only reason that the GX7 is 5 points below the E-M1 (it is remarkable that it is only 5 point below, perhaps that is more inconclusive), is wrong. If you look at the other results it is very understandable that it did not go beyond the 80 threshold. There are numerous other aspects, where the GX7 clearly cannot match the E-M1 and other cameras, which received the gold award. Just look at the raw buffer and the robustness of the E-M1, and you'll get, why the GX7 is well served with 79%.

When i first considered the GX7 I was concerned about the 'tearing' issue of the EVF. I tried it in the shop and have not experienced rainbow tearing at all in 2 weeks usage. Other reviews say the same. The data rate on the GX7 is increased from the G5/G6 EVFs so this should lessen the effect. Some people seem to notice the effect more than others so if you are concerned go and try it out for yourself.

I find the statement that it cannot be used outdoors to be nothing short of absurd.

And as for 'adds bulk to camera' of course it does, but not nearly so much as the VF4 perched precariously on top of the Olympus EP-5.

This review and scoring does not appear to be very objective to me.

Of course, it's not objective. All of this crap about a poor EVF in the GX7 is BS. I tried the GX7 in my local camera shop and I was very impressed with the EVF AND I wear eyeglasses. I saw no "tearing" and "rainbow effect." The bottom line is that most of this negative BS about the EVF is being said by two kinds of people:

1. Those who need to see an optometrist.

2. Oly fanboys who will never have an ounce of objectiveness towards Pany cameras.

The bottom line is that I'm going to order the black GX7 from my local camera shop and I'm stoked about owning this camera!

When i first considered the GX7 I was concerned about the 'tearing' issue of the EVF. I tried it in the shop and have not experienced rainbow tearing at all in 2 weeks usage. Other reviews say the same. The data rate on the GX7 is increased from the G5/G6 EVFs so this should lessen the effect. Some people seem to notice the effect more than others so if you are concerned go and try it out for yourself.

I find the statement that it cannot be used outdoors to be nothing short of absurd.

And as for 'adds bulk to camera' of course it does, but not nearly so much as the VF4 perched precariously on top of the Olympus EP-5.

This review and scoring does not appear to be very objective to me.

Of course, it's not objective. All of this crap about a poor EVF in the GX7 is BS. I tried the GX7 in my local camera shop and I was very impressed with the EVF AND I wear eyeglasses. I saw no "tearing" and "rainbow effect." The bottom line is that most of this negative BS about the EVF is being said by two kinds of people:

1. Those who need to see an optometrist.

2. Oly fanboys who will never have an ounce of objectiveness towards Pany cameras.

The bottom line is that I'm going to order the black GX7 from my local camera shop and I'm stoked about owning this camera!

Different eyes have different experiences with EVF's. And unfortunately for Panasonic, those that review Panasonic cameras all have eyes that have problems with Panasonic EVF's.

And Panasonic finder *currently* are more prone causing problems for users.

Personally, I think that's a good thing as it would make Panasonic to engineer and build better EVF's because there are certainly problems with them.

Therefore we need to raise this issue.

I am not an Oly fanboy. Actually the only Oly camera I have is an old Olympus 35 RD which needs it's shutters CLA'd. Heck, currently I don't have any Oly lenses either (though that's more of a case of not having enough $$$ to get them...). And although I haven't encountered the problems DPR is reporting (tearing, etc.) I do instantly notice that the Oly EVF's are much easier on my eyes, cleaner, and clearer (though I do like the colours and tone better in the GX7 EVF).

When i first considered the GX7 I was concerned about the 'tearing' issue of the EVF. I tried it in the shop and have not experienced rainbow tearing at all in 2 weeks usage. Other reviews say the same. The data rate on the GX7 is increased from the G5/G6 EVFs so this should lessen the effect. Some people seem to notice the effect more than others so if you are concerned go and try it out for yourself.

I find the statement that it cannot be used outdoors to be nothing short of absurd.

And as for 'adds bulk to camera' of course it does, but not nearly so much as the VF4 perched precariously on top of the Olympus EP-5.

The bulk argument is nonsense of course.

This review and scoring does not appear to be very objective to me.

Just because you don't agree with the result, that does not mean that the review was not taken with care. A review is always some sort of subjective, the important thing is, if it is conclusive.

I find the review very reasonable. If the reviewer sees strong rainbow tearing, should he ignore it? The still very good result just did not make it to 80, which would have given it the gold award. Thinking that the judgement of the view finder is the only reason that the GX7 is 5 points below the E-M1 (it is remarkable that it is only 5 point below, perhaps that is more inconclusive), is wrong. If you look at the other results it is very understandable that it did not go beyond the 80 threshold. There are numerous other aspects, where the GX7 clearly cannot match the E-M1 and other cameras, which received the gold award. Just look at the raw buffer and the robustness of the E-M1, and you'll get, why the GX7 is well served with 79%.

on comparing the GX7 with the E-M1. E-M1 is totally a different class of camera. It is totally non-sensical and unfair to compare the GX7 to the E-M1. The proper comparison would be with the E-P5. The rating of the GX7 should have nothing to do with the E-M1.

In general, although I probably would have rated the GX7 a tinsy bit higher but I don't have too much problems with DPR rating it as a 79.

I was hoping that the review would say something about how effective the IBIS is compared to the base IBIS on the Oly E-PL5 or the 5-axis system used on the E-M5, E-M1, and E-P5. Lenstip tested a fairly modest effect of less than 2 stops, but other reviewers have claimed it is as effective as Oly's 5-axis system.

Seems like if you do the comparison at the end they prefer the GH3 EVF to that of the GX7 for some reason. I have the GH3 and like the EVF just fine, even wearing glasses. But I know I'm in the minority.

I use the WiFI everyday to upload to my iPhone 5s and ultimately to Instagram. Works like a charm. How about using a camera if you're going to attempt to review it. Frankly IMO if you don't have the camera you really shouldn't be commenting on how well a feature does and doesn't work.

- reading about the wifi capability leads me to conclude it is pretty unusable. Pity...

How about being friendly to each other? I confess not having used the camera, and frankly I don't think I can conclude anything by having a try for five minutes in a shop. So I have to rely on the comments in the review. The review here is not very fond of it, to say the least (I would not how to interpret what they have to say about it in another way.)

Ironically DPR downgraded the GX7 IBIS simply because it is deactivated when used for video rather than actually testing its effectiveness for stills. One poster on this forum offered some extensive tests with many comparative pictures between the IBIS of EM5 and GX7 and found to his surprise the 2 axis IBIS on GX7 to be far superior to the 5 axis IBIS of EM5 at slower shutter speeds on virtually every lens outside of the 20mm where they were about equal!

I would have liked to read about it in the review. Anyway, do you have a link about this comparison?

I was hoping that the review would say something about how effective the IBIS is compared to the base IBIS on the Oly E-PL5 or the 5-axis system used on the E-M5, E-M1, and E-P5. Lenstip tested a fairly modest effect of less than 2 stops, but other reviewers have claimed it is as effective as Oly's 5-axis system.

The review says the IBIS works as advertised. Panasonic says it is like the Mega OIS. So I suppose it provides the performance of Mega OIS. I do not know how many stops that is.

Decent review though I don't necessarily agree with all of. I don't see the ev as adding bulk as such. Never seen the need of in camera raw converter and IBIS to me isn't such a biggy either as it's the first Panasonic mirrorless to include it.For me it ticks all the boxes. Love the styling of it and takes great images. For me it's a winner and as soon as I sell all my dslr gear, it's the camera I'll be getting

Thanks, ol Don. I have seen that before and it is excellent. It just gets up my nose that DPR hasn't done a proper review of this excellent camera st an amazing price or even just extended their hands-on a bit.

Yes, but is is an optional accessory! And it costs money, so it brings up the price. Plus, the best VF is one that is always there if needed! I know, because I have the E-PL5 and the VF-2 (I had it from a previous Pen). I like the camera very much, and the VF is on occasion very useful - when I don't forget it at home!

You do yourself a disservice by quoting only half a sentence. I will rewrite it for your benefit once more.

The EP5+VF4 is better quality than GX7 with the convenience of a built-in EVF. It is a question of what you prefer - better quality or convenience.

If you look at the rating chart you can see the GX7 did well in every category but since there are no numerical values shown makes it difficult to challenge whatever mark DNR decided to give the the GX7 but appears to be subjective not objective?

This is not a question.

I was beginning to wonder if DPR would do this test given it took them a year to do one for the GH3 and none at all for the G6 GF6 GX1 etc but published one for the EM1 only weeks after it was introduced?

This is not a question.

Appears they had to given the rave reviews from other sources on the GX7 Still in their comparisons they fail to emphasize its EVF more than twice the resolution of that of EM5, likewise that of the LCD screen, no flash on EM5 with extreme yellow cast in low light, and GX7 has WiFi connectability.

This is not a question. Finally a declarative sentence that you didn't end with a question mark. Bravo (golf clap)

Also DPR used different lenses of different focal length to make their comparisons?

This is not a question.

What is with this question mark abuse that seems prevalent lately? You've written 5 sentences above. None were questions, yet you ended 4 with question marks. What is that? Why? Butchering the language?

Yes, but is is an optional accessory! And it costs money, so it brings up the price. Plus, the best VF is one that is always there if needed! I know, because I have the E-PL5 and the VF-2 (I had it from a previous Pen). I like the camera very much, and the VF is on occasion very useful - when I don't forget it at home!

You do yourself a disservice by quoting only half a sentence. I will rewrite it for your benefit once more.

The EP5+VF4 is better quality than GX7 with the convenience of a built-in EVF. It is a question of what you prefer - better quality or convenience.

You prefer convenience and that is fine.

Quality in this case does not include shutter shock? Fine.

Why do you think EP5 was not rated higher? Not many users have reported shutter shock problems with it. Who knows, you might see some users reporting shutter shock issues with the GX7.

Latest in-depth reviews

Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.

No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.

Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.

The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.